View Story | 16 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Transgendered-rights activists make up a much smaller and less influential group than gay-rights activists, so I'm not sure separating the two issues will actually "better serve" Frank's expressed "ultimate goal". Passing the LGB-no-T version of the bill would be a "good enough" solution for enough people that further expanding it would become a non-issue politically for quite some time.
"See a world of tanks, ruled by a world of banks." —Sol Invictus
by Delirium on Sun Sep 30, 2007 at 01:38:08 PM PDT
Exclusion now makes me think it would be even harder to include transgendered persons in the future.
Don't get me wrong. I don't think Barney Frank doesn't care about the transgendered community. But throwing the transgendered out of ENDA for political expediency is just plain wrong.
No more Republican rule.
by HarveyMilk on Sun Sep 30, 2007 at 01:40:36 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Did the same a while ago but started advocating for transgender inclusion after many of their supporters (like me) stopped donating over it.
There used to be a time in this country when people would fight and die for what they believed in. Now they just worry about whether or not they have enough votes.
So many impeachable offenses, so little time... -6.0 -5.33
by Cali Techie on Sun Sep 30, 2007 at 02:04:21 PM PDT
Have you recommended rserven's diary yet?
if not, time's a watin' ```` peace
U.S. Mayors to Congress: "Pass H.R. 676 NOW"
by peace voter on Sun Sep 30, 2007 at 01:41:17 PM PDT
...the advancement for the GLB folks, what makes you think that it will speed things up for transgendered people by making their inclusion contingent on passing any bill. Your assumption seems to be that there's broad support and passage of a bill to address gays, lesbians and bisexuals will be easy.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not willing to accept that you're right. We haven't gotten this far any time before, and it's just been in the last few years that gays were the GOP punching bags and a shitload of states passed referenda on banning same-sex marriage. So I think you're making a big assumption here, that if Congress holds out just a little longer that the entire loaf will be attainable. I don't see any evidence to support that idea, and in fact, I think recent history suggests that it's dead wrong.
The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.
by DHinMI on Sun Sep 30, 2007 at 01:49:07 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 16 comments